I agree, but it seems that an EV watershed and the presence of trout often go together. I note that all "wilderness trout streams" are eligible for designation as EV. So the reverse has a reasonable, or at least it passes a threshold, chance of being true.

Good trout habitat is not required to be EV. That was my point. Just because it's EV does NOT mean it's suitable for trout. Perhaps it gets too warm? Perhaps there's no suitable gravel for spawning. Perhaps it's slow, shallow, and wide? Having an EV stream nearby doesn't mean you should expect it to harbor wild trout.

Also, EV is not required to have good habitat. As an example, Spring Creek in Centre County is not EV. The stream has the highest, or at least one of the highest wild trout populations in the state and it's not designated as EV because of pollutants.

ALL streams are eligible for designation as EV, trout or no trout.

All of the streams on the wilderness list are indeed EV. It's not because being on the list makes them EV, it's because the PFBC won't include them on the list if they're not. This list is an arbitrary sampling of streams that the PFBC, not the DEP, wishes to highlight. Requirements for inclusion are that it's public, runs away from roads, has decent wild trout fishing, and holds EV status. Even then, it does not include all of the streams which meet that description.

Thanks for the enlightenment! To further and finally flog the moribund equine, my only inartfully articulated point was: my EV stream has bugs, cold water, and all sorts of habitat, but apparently does not support reproducing populations, and that is a darn shame!